Clay Shaw -- perjurer???? (II)
Dreitzes
Garrison apologists is that Shaw perjured himself on the witness stand, and was
therefore, apparently, deserving of persecution regardless of the paucity of
evidence against him. But is even the allegation of perjury true?
*Did Clay Shaw perjure himself when he said he never worked for the CIA?*
No; the claim that Shaw perjured himself is based on the ill-informed belief
that anyone who performs a service for the CIA is an agent or employee. Shaw
served as a contact for the Domestic Contact Services division of the CIA
between 1948 and 1956; there is no evidence that he was ever employed by the
CIA as a contract agent or in any other capacity. Just as FBI Paid Criminal
Informant Jack Ruby can in no manner be designated an agent or employee of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, CIA domestic contacts -- paid or unpaid -- are
not agents or employees of the Central Intelligence Agency.
Hundreds if not thousands of businessmen who travel and trade abroad serve as
domestic contacts for the CIA, providing a legitimate source of intelligence.
"Contact" status in no way relates to the notorious exploits of the CIA's
Covert Action arm, and cannot be reasonably related to the Kennedy
assassination in any manner.
Many Garrison boosters don't even realize that Shaw was not charged with
perjury regarding the CIA; Shaw was charged with perjury for denying
associations with Lee Harvey Oswald and David William Ferrie. Garrison had no
evidence whatsoever that Shaw worked for the CIA (or was even a contract agent
-- many Garrison fans don't even understand the difference) and his followers
would likewise come up empty-handed when trying to substantiate the claim.
Meanwhile, documents released in the mid-'90s under the JFK Records Act have
fueled speculation that Shaw was indeed a contract agent. But what do these
documents actually say?
In Fair Play, Martin Shackelford writes, "The CIA paid for one of Shaw's trips
in 1955, and the following year he actively solicited information for them.
Although a CIA internal report described him as a valuable informant, his
formal connection with the Agency suddenly ended in 1956. His CIA activities,
though, continued. The House Select Committee on Assassinations learned, but
didn't report, that Shaw was heavily involved in anti-Castro activities; he
allowed one group rent-free space in his International Trade Mart. He had a
working relationship with former FBI agent Guy Banister, many of whose former
employees now confirm that Banister employed Oswald in the summer of 1963."
As Shackelford omits source citations in his article, the basis of the
allegation that the CIA paid for a trip in 1955 is unknown, although this
writer does not contest the fact. CIA contacts are often reimbursed for
services performed. Shackelford likewise omits any citation or description of
the manner in which Shaw "actively solicited information" for the CIA, or a
description of the type of information he allegedly sought. There is nothing to
indicate that Shaw was acting as anything more than the informant the CIA long
ago revealed him to have been.
The statement about Shaw's so-called "CIA activities" continuing after 1956 is
misleading. For one thing, Shaw had never been involved in any "CIA activities"
in an operational sense. There also is no firm evidence that Shaw's agency ties
extended past 1956, as will be examined shortly.
Shackelford refers to a relationship between Shaw and William George Gaudet,
something worthy of investigation. Gaudet published the Latin American
Newsletter out of the rent-free office at the Trade Mart. Gaudet himself had
been a CIA domestic contact until 1961, and told journalist Anthony Summers in
1978 that the Newsletter was a CIA front operation. This is not a charge that
can be dismissed outright: Although the Newsletter's official sponsor was
Standard Fruit, a company which did a tremendous amount of business in Latin
America, a great deal of its funding came from New Orleans doctor Alton
Ochsner, founder of the Ochsner Clinic, who had a long-standing relationship
with the CIA that has not been adequately explained with regard to his
anti-Communist activities in New Orleans over the years.
Gaudet himself plays a murky role in the story of Oswald's 1963 summer in New
Orleans. He happened to be next in line to Oswald when Oswald applied for his
Mexican tourist visa. Though the registry list was published by the Warren
Commission, Gaudet's name was withheld from the public until it accidentally
leaked out in 1975. Gaudet insisted he did not see Oswald that day and called
the event a coincidence. He did say, however, that he'd seen Oswald around the
Trade Mart and, most interestingly, he said he had witnessed Oswald conversing
at length with New Orleans ultra right-wing extremist Guy Banister on several
occasions.
Gaudet, who is now deceased, remains something of a mystery, though his
relationship to the International Trade Mart may not prove especially
noteworthy, since -- according to Garrison advocate Jim DiEugenio's *Destiny
Betrayed* -- it was ITM employee Ted Brent, not Clay Shaw, who allowed Gaudet
the use of ITM office space. As an institution prominently involved in
facilitating trade with Latin America, the ITM could have had legitimate
reasons for providing an office for the Latin American Newsletter. And if the
Newsletter was indeed a front for a CIA operation, as Gaudet has stated, there
are any number of explanations that don't require implicating anyone in high
crimes or assassinations.
It is now theorized that Shaw may well have had a working relationship with
rabid anti-Communist, ex-FBI Bureau Chief Guy Banister; many New Orleans civic
leaders did. However, even for those who theorize that Lee Harvey Oswald was
somehow involved in Banister's operation, this hardly implies a link between
Shaw and Oswald. In short, Shackelford generates a lot of smoke with no
evidence of fire.
Shackelford continues, "As late as 1967, Shaw had a 'covert security'
classification for a top secret program called QK/ENCHANT. The program remains
so highly classified that we are still unable to learn anything about its
nature, but Shaw's classification was approved by the CIA's then covert
operations chief, Richard Helms, and we know that clearances were being granted
in December 1962.
"Former CIA official Victor Marchetti said that QK/ENCHANT was most likely run
out of the Domestic Operations Division of the Clandestine Services, run by
Tracy Barnes. Support for this comes from recently released documents
identifying Barnes' then-deputy, E. Howard Hunt, as another individual involved
with QK/ENCHANT. We also know that a pilot was considered for clearance for the
program. One of the few others known to have been cleared for QK/ENCHANT was
Monroe Sullivan, director of the San Francisco Trade Mart, and Shaw's alibi
witness for November 22, 1963. At the time of the House Select Committee
investigation in 1976, inquiries to the CIA about Clay Shaw were coordinated by
J. Walton Moore, the former Dallas CIA contact for Oswald's friend George De
Mohrenschildt."
Webmaster John McAdams notes that a document from the HSCA, CIA Segregated
Collection, puts a different light on this. . . . a series of handwritten
notes, presumably by an HSCA staffer," dated June 28, 1978 and regarding a
"possible CIA connection" to "Clay Shaw." Referring to a CIA memo of September
18, 1968, it notes that Shaw was "granted covert security approval for use
under Project [REDACTED] on an unwitting basis 10 Dec. 62" (NARA
180-10143-10220, Agency File Number 29-04-01). McAdams also cites a CIA
memorandum dated 26 April 1967, which reports that "J. Monroe Sullivan,
#280207, was granted a covert security approval on 10 December 1962 so that he
could be used in Project [REDACTED]. SHAW has #402897-A."
These are the documents that the Assassination Records Review Board has now
confirmed are in reference to QK/ENCHANT. McAdams notes that Shaw's "approval,"
not "clearance," was for use on an UNWITTING basis.
Shackelford's conclusions would seem to be unfounded. The Agency was either
using Shaw as an unsuspecting source of intelligence of an unknown nature or
they were actually spying on HIM for some reason.
Victor Marchetti is quoted frequently by conspiracy theorists despite the
questionable nature of his information. It should be kept in mind that
Marchetti incorrectly informed researcher A. J. Weberman in the '70s that the
existence of a CIA 201 file in Oswald's name was proof that Oswald had been a
CIA contract agent. 201 files actually have nothing to do with contract
employment or operational use of a subject.
The references to Tracy Barnes, Howard Hunt, and George De Mohrenschildt are
window dressing: Shaw himself had no idea that any CIA operation was going on
around him, and there is no reason to believe he ever had any relationship with
Howard Hunt or any of the other figures named.
We also know that J. Monroe Sullivan, onetime director of the San Francisco
World Trade Center had been granted a "covert security approval" for
QK/ENCHANT. Sullivan told Patricia Lambert in 1997 that he'd never heard of any
such thing and that he'd never worked for the CIA. That's a reasonable enough
claim: Like Shaw, Sullivan was approved for unwitting use.
Now, you ask, what exactly was QK/ENCHANT? We don't know; the CIA isn't
talking. If two men involved in international trade were unwittingly involved,
one might guess that QK/ENCHANT had something to do with business-related
intelligence. Why don't we ask the authority on Shaw's purported CIA
connections, Mr. Bill Davy. From "Through the Looking Glass," p. 54 fn. 16:
(quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CIA Information and Privacy coordinator, John Wright, has written to the author
that information on QK/ENCHANT is still classified. Yet, an admitted ex-CIA
employee has broadcast on a popular computer Bulletin Board System, that
QK/ENCHANT involved routine debriefing of people in the trade industry. Either
this person has violated his/her secrecy agreement by revealing classified
information or is deliberately spreading false information. Time will tell.
(end quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Shackelford continues, "Another recently released document connects Shaw to the
top secret project ZR/CLIFF, which was run out of William Harvey's super-secret
Staff D along with the ZR/RIFLE assassination program."
This writer has not seen the document in question, so a definitive conclusion
cannot be drawn. The CIA's Staff D was a division generally involved with
cryptography, although the existence of ZR/RIFLE, the CIA's top-secret
assassinations training operation was confirmed by the Church Committee in
1975. Shackelford notes that ZR/RIFLE, though operated out of Staff D, was kept
separate from the crypto operations, and suggests that the same may be true of
ZR/CLIFF. He explains, "The top-secret CIA division Staff D was used to conceal
the highly-sensitive ZR/RIFLE assassination program. ZR/CLIFF may well have
been handled in the same fashion, as it was also run out of Staff D. What we
don't know is why it would be that highly sensitive" (E-mail to this author,
December 3, 1998).
In five months, Shackelford has not been able to come up with a citation for
his claim. The closest I can find is a Bill Davy allegation from *Through the
Looking Glass* claiming to link Shaw to a pilot who was allegedly considered
but refused for the ZR/CLIFF project:
Leslie Norman Bradley (described as a "soldier- of-fortune and freelance
pilot") was alleged by Klansman/Minuteman Jules Ricco Kimble to have known Clay
Shaw, and that NORMAN "was once considered for employment as a pilot in Project
ZR/CLIFF, but for unknown reasons the offer of employment was withdrawn" (Davy,
9).
It would appear the entire "ZR/CLIFF" accusation is another false lead. I do
yet again invite Mr. Shackelford to produce that citation, however.
The latest allegation regarding Shaw, the CIA, and assassination plots involves
Freeport Sulphur, which, according to researcher Lisa Pease, is "a company that
connects the CIA, the Rockefellers, Clay Shaw and [CIA officer] David Phillips.
The company had serious clashes with Castro over an expensive project, and with
the Kennedy administration over matters of great monetary significance to
Freeport. Allegations of a Canadian connection with New Orleans, and Cuban
nickel mining and processing operations fit neatly into Shaw's reported
activities. And this is a company which had at least one director reportedly
talking about killing Castro." Pease's case can be examined at:
http://www.webcom.com/~lpease/collections/hidden/board.htm
*What about this Centro Mondiale Commerciale?*
Clay Shaw sat on the board of directors of Centro Mondiale Commerciale, an
alleged CIA front, and its subsidiary, Permindex, which has been linked by some
to assassination plots directed against foreign leaders. These allegations were
the subject of a 1967 article in an Italian newspaper, Paese Sera. CMC had been
ejected from both Italy and Switzerland and relocated to Johannesburg, South
Africa, due to perceived subversive activities, including alleged assassination
plots against Charles de Gaulle and others. The Italian authorities accused CMC
of money laundering and of being a CIA front company, and its officers' refusal
to divulge information about the source of some of its funds contributed
towards its hasty ejection from the country.
A State Department memo released by the Assassination Records Review Board
confirms the long-alleged identities of Shaw's fellow board members, an
astonishing bunch consisting largely of former officials of Nazi Germany and
Fascist Italy.
Shaw told *Penthouse* magazine, "Back in 1959 or 1960, a young Italian came to
see me in New Orleans and told me about a world trade center that was being
planned in Rome. The idea was to have one place where buyers coming into the
Common Market area would find all the Common Market countries represented in
one center. He wanted my advice and asked me to serve on the board of
directors. I had no objection if it was a legitimate project. I investigated it
and found that the head of it was a man named Imre Nagy, who had been the last
non-Communist premier of Hungary. Some of the other people involved were
Italian senators, journalists, lawyers, and other responsible people. It was
agreed that we would have an exhibit at their center, and they would have one
at the mart here in New Orleans, and we would exchange information and so on. I
didn't mind being on their board, although there was no money involved, but I
would have to go to Rome annually to the board meetings and my way would be
paid, so why not? Then they ran into difficulties, but they finally got the
center opened. It turned out to be either badly planned or badly organized and
it closed very shortly, and that was the last I ever heard of it. I never heard
that it was a CIA operation and I don't know that it was. I'll say this -- it
was a highly unsuccessful operation which is not customary with the CIA. Other
than what I've told you, I know nothing more about the Centro Mondiale
Commerciale. I have never had any connection with the CIA."
The *Paese Sera* charges were never especially well documented. Inevitably,
what little we know about CMC/Permindex comes from sources of questionable
reliability.
Alleged former CIA agent Robert Morrow describes flying to Greece with David
Ferrie to transport a cache of arms from a Permindex warehouse to Houma,
Louisiana. This is implied to be the cache later acquired in Houma by a
CIA-backed group of anti-Castro plotters including Ferrie, Gordon Novel, and
Sergio Arcacha Smith -- some of the same cast of characters that Morrow and
others have fingered in the assassination, and whom Jim Garrison himself had
been investigating. Morrow's source regarding the shipment's destination is CIA
officer Tracy Barnes, who, of course, is not alive to substantiate the author's
story.
Ulric Shannon researched Morrow's claims for a review of Morrow's *First Hand
Knowledge.* Shannon's article demonstrates that Morrow's story lacks even a
semblance of credibility:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/morrow.htm
The pseudonymous "William Torbitt," believed to be Texas attorney David
Copeland, in a 1970 manuscript entitled *Nomenclature of an Assassination
Cabal,* and published recently as *Nazis, NASA & JFK,* accused Permindex of
complicity in the JFK assassination. "Torbitt's" sole cited source is the
*Paese Sera* article.
*Didn't the CIA try to destroy Garrison's investigation?*
Former CIA agent-turned-author Victor Marchetti testified to the HSCA that he
heard Richard Helms and various CIA officers discuss the Shaw trial on numerous
occasions, and quotes Helms as asking of one agent, "Are we doing everything we
can [for Shaw]?"
While Marchetti's credibility remains questionable, Robert Tanenbaum, onetime
Deputy Counsel for the House Select Committee on Assassinations, stated in an
interview with Jim DiEugenio that he'd seen documents proving the CIA
interfered with the Garrison investigation, and both he and HSCA investigator
Gaeton Fonzi have alleged that the DA's office was infiltrated and disrupted by
CIA agents. Such allegations remain unsubstantiated.
When researcher Vince Salandria worked with Garrison, they and other members of
Garrison's team believed that the CIA was actively plotting against them.
Salandria admits now that a lot of this was simple paranoia: "I would see
anybody trying to destroy Garrison as a CIA agent" (JFK: The Book of the Film,
195).
*Wasn't there a massive government conspiracy against Jim Garrison?*
That's what Garrison said. But is there any truth to that assertion?
If there was a government conspiracy against Jim Garrison's office . . .
1. Why did the Supreme Court (under Earl Warren) refuse to intervene and
dismiss the Shaw case when they had the chance? (New York Times, December 20,
1968)
2. Why did Ohio Governor James Rhodes agree to extradite Garrison witness
Gordon Novel? ("Novel Will Be Returned -- Ohio," New Orleans Time-Picayune, May
10, 1967; cited in Epstein, *Counterplot*)
3. Why did Judge William T. Gillie dismiss the extradition case against
Gordon Novel only after REPEATEDLY asking Garrison's office to complete the
necessary paperwork within the required sixty-day period? ("Ohio Frees
'Witness' Sought by Garrison," New York Times, July 4, 1967; cited in Epstein)
4. Why did California Governor Ronald Reagan refuse to extradite Garrison
suspect Edgar Eugene Bradley only after Garrison's office refused to present
even the slightest evidence of Bradley's complicity in the assassination? (New
York Times, November 9, 1968; cited in Epstein)
5. Why did Nebraska and then Iowa authorities refuse to extradite witness
Sandra Moffett, when the Shaw trial transcript proves it was the defense -- not
the prosecution -- that wanted Moffett's testimony? (Shaw trial transcript,
opening day arguments)
6. Why did Texas authorities agree to allow Garrison's office to depose
Sergio Arcacha Smith -- an offer that Garrison turned down? (cf. Paris
Flammonde, *The Kennedy Conspiracy,* 117-21)
7. Why was Judge Charles W. Halleck, Jr., about to hear Harold Weisberg
and Bud Fensterwald's arguments for releasing the JFK autopsy materials to the
New Orleans DA when Charles Ward at Garrison's office phoned Weisberg and
Fensterwald AT THE COURTHOUSE and ordered them to drop the entire suit?
(Weisberg, *Post Mortem,* 135-6; Livingstone, *Killing the Truth,* 376).
8. Why did the courts enforce Garrison's subpoena to LIFE magazine for the
Zapruder film?
9. Why did Judge Herbert J. Christenberry dismiss Garrison's perjury
charges against Clay Shaw only after a lengthy 1971 hearing in which, among
other curious incidents, Garrison refused to state how many witnesses he had
against Clay Shaw at the time of Shaw's arrest, refused to answer questions
about the veracity of witness Vernon Bundy's testimony, refused to elaborate on
his claim that more had come out of his investigation than merely the Shaw
prosecution, and -- perhaps most curious of all -- Garrison's star witness,
Perry Raymond Russo, pleaded the Fifth Amendment when he was called to testify
on Garrison's behalf? (Christenberry transcript; Patricia Lambert, *False
Witness,* 165-79)
10. Why -- in thirty years -- has not a shred of evidence emerged
indicating that elements of the US government obstructed Jim Garrison's case or
interfered with his investigation?
As Jim Garrison himself pointed out in his oft-quoted *Playboy* interview, "The
very repetition of a charge lends it a certain credibility, since people have a
tendency to believe that where there's smoke, there's fire . . ."
One thing is certain: If there exists even a single shred of evidence
implicating Clay L. Shaw in a conspiracy to assassinate President John F.
Kennedy, Jim Garrison failed to unearth it for Shaw's 1969 trial, and his
advocates have failed to turn it up in the three decades since.
Tony Pitman
Yes Dave, but you are taking it for granted that the agency is telling
you the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
They have denied many different things over the years which have
turned out not to be be the case so what makes you think things are so
different here.
Shaw had held a quite senior position in intelligence during the war
years and the fact that he was in fact still doing some work for the
post war outfit means that he was still using his skills. You say that
he was only a contact but the fact is that we dont know exactly what
he was doing.
He was on the boards of Permindex and Centro Mondiale which we now
know to have been Mossad fronts so one thing he would have been
reporting back on was their activities.
Perhaps this was what one of those super secret projects he was
cleared for was all about. Since they came under Angleton's control it
is very likely and it would have been a mutual arrangement between the
two agencies.
I dont believe your so gullible as to think he was just a businessman
with all of this going on but I think you sure are worried about
something
As I said to you and John McAdams once, you protesteth too much. It
comes accross as tho you are very concerned that people are getting
too close to something. For that to be true you would have to know
what that something is of course and I dont think you do.
Are you just worried about where it all might lead Dave?
It could well be to late for that.
Tony
Dreitzes
No, Tony, *you* are taking it for granted they are *not* telling the truth
about Shaw. What is your evidence for this?
>They have denied many different things over the years which have
>turned out not to be be the case so what makes you think things are so
>different here.
The fact that you and your fellow Garrinoids can't cite a single shred of
evidence that Clay Shaw was ever an agent or employee of any intelligence
agency.
>Shaw had held a quite senior position in intelligence during the war
>years
Tony, I've asked you before to back up that claim with a reliable primary
source. You have never responded. No one has. Would you care to rectify that
now?
What is your basis for stating that Clay Shaw "held a quite senior position in
intelligence during the war years"? What is your basis for believing Shaw
*ever* held such a position? Can you or anyone else cite a reliable primary
source for your assertion?
>and the fact that he was in fact still doing some work for the
>post war outfit
Two problems here, Tony: First, Clay Shaw never worked for the CIA; the HSCA
determined that Shaw had never worked for them and had never been paid a dime
for any of the information on international trade he was kind enough to provide
to them. Second, the CIA did not even exist until several years after the war,
so how can you assert he was "still" working for them? Even if was working for
the OSS -- something I'd like to see some evidence of, please -- he could not
have been "still" working for them after the war. They folded up and the CIA
was created to replace them. Almost four years went by between the end of the
war and the time Clay Shaw was contacted about providing information to the
Agency. Therefore, your statement leaps around in logic like the Magic Bullet
leaping from victim to victim, wouldn't you say?
> means that he was still using his skills.
Ah! Another hit for the Magic CIA Theory! Shaw was providing information on
international trade to the DCS from December 1948 to 1956, and he had no
background in international trade prior to getting his job at the Trade Mart in
1946. So what intelligence "skills" are you asserting he used in the war years
and afterward?
You say that
>he was only a contact but the fact is that we dont know exactly what
>he was doing.
WRONG, TONY. We have the reports that were written from the information he
provided. Patricia Lambert has summarized the contents of those reports and
I've posted her summary verbatim. What else do we need to see, Tony?
>He was on the boards of Permindex and Centro Mondiale which we now
>know to have been Mossad fronts
Tony, I have Michael Collins Piper's book -- he was kind enough to send me a
copy. Guess what, Tony? Piper's arguments are founded entirely on Paris
Flammonde's Permindex information, which itself is based entirely on a series
of articles advanced by an Italian tabloid. Mr. Piper has not even taken the
trouble to find out if there is the slightest bit of truth to what that
tabloid, *Paese Sera,* claimed. That tabloid is regarded so poorly in Italy
that Dave Stager could not find copies of these articles in any of the several
libraries there he visited in search of these legendary items. Mr. Stager was
so unsuccessful in his efforts to find copies of these articles that he
questions whether they ever even existed in the first place. Guess what? To
date, no one has been able to confirm that they did! No one outside Garrison's
office seems to have ever seen these groundbreaking works of investigative
journalism.
Now, Tony, I don't claim these articles don't exist. I simply suspect that this
tabloid, like the tabloids we have in the US, isn't a high priority for
libraries to stock. But what does it tell you about Mr. Piper that not only did
he not bother to confirm that these articles exist, but he made no effort
whatsoever to confirm that their (alleged?) contents are true and accurate?
Tony, NO ONE has ever confirmed that these articles were true and accurate! NO
ONE.
>so one thing he would have been
>reporting back on was their activities.
>Perhaps this was what one of those super secret projects he was
>cleared for was all about.
TONY, WAKE UP!!!! He was not "cleared" for any "super secret projects"! He was
an UNWITTING source of intelligence for an operation called QK/ENCHANT --
that's what the document says, Tony; approved for "unwitting" use -- and Martin
Shackelford says he was linked to something called ZR/CLIFF, something for
which Mr. Shackelford -- whom I normally respect -- cannot produce a citation.
Even Bill Davy's *Through the Looking Glass,* which *mentions* ZR/CLIFF, never
accuses Shaw of being involved with it.
>Since they came under Angleton's control it
>is very likely and it would have been a mutual arrangement between the
>two agencies.
You're way out in the ether, Tony . . . that's what happens when you believe
everything you read in conspiracy books . . .
>I dont believe your so gullible as to think he was just a businessman
Tony, I am indeed that gullible. I am so ridiculously gullible that I will
merrily assert that Shaw was a businessman, a playwright, a restorer of French
Quarter homes, a supporter of liberal causes, and a patron of the arts, and
nothing more sinister than that. If you disagree with me, for God's sake, prove
me wrong already. PLEASE, be my guest!
>with all of this going on but I think you sure are worried about
>something
I sure am, Tony. I'm worried that people actually believe the garbage that Jim
Garrison and his Garrinoids are dishing out. If you don't think that history is
something worth being worried about, then I guess you'd better just assume that
I'm a CIA -- or Mossad -- "disinformation agent."
>As I said to you and John McAdams once, you protesteth too much.
But you can't "protesteth" back with any evidence, can you? Why not? I would
stop "protestesthing" if you would just show me where I'm wrong.
It
>comes accross as tho you are very concerned that people are getting
>too close to something.
No, Tony, I'm very concerned that people are getting too FAR from something --
the truth.
>For that to be true you would have to know
>what that something is of course and I dont think you do.
Well, that's reassuring.
>Are you just worried about where it all might lead Dave?
Yup. I'm worried that it will lead to no one knowing the truth because everyone
is too busy reading (and writing!) books based on third- and fourth-hand
hearsay instead of reality.
>It could well be to late for that.
>
>Tony
I think it is, Tony. I think it is.
DR
Martin Shackelford
The Shaw/ZRCLIFF document was published as a photocopy in Probe.
I've mentioned this before, but you continue to report that I've given
no cite.
Martin
--
Martin Shackelford
"You're going to find that many of the truths we
cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."
-Obi-Wan Kenobi
"You must unlearn what you have learned." --Yoda
Dreitzes
>
>Dave:
>
> The Shaw/ZRCLIFF document was published as a photocopy in Probe.
>I've mentioned this before, but you continue to report that I've given
>no cite.
>
>Martin
Could you kindly post the relevant citation, Martin? If you only typed in a
word a day, I suspect we'd have it by now.
DR
mshack
New Light on the Jim Garrison Investigation, regarding QKENCHANT:
p. 195: A document notes that J. Monroe SULLIVAN [at whose Trade Mart
Clay Shaw spoke on November 22, 1963] "was granted a covert security
approval on 10 December 1962 so that he could be used in Project
QKENCHANT. SHAW has #402897-A." The "has," present tense, is from the
document dated March 16, 1967.
p. 196: "Reference is made to your request for a Covert Security
Approval on Subject [E. Howard Hunt], dated 3 June 1970, for utilization
under Project QKENCHANT." Was Hunt an "unwitting" participant in the
Project? He had the same kind of clearance as Sullivan and Shaw.
p. 197: A CIA computer printout sheet:
/N SHAW,CLAY SR S333959
/A BERTRAND,CLAY /YM
/D SER 1951
/R IW R402897-A 2088478 67
[Note the 67; same year as the above-quoted QKENCHANT memo.]
p. 200: Another note in the CIA's Shaw file says:
"Y # file- 33412 destroyed."
p. 288: On January 12, 1954, Guy Persac Johnson of New Orleans was
granted a covert security clearance for use in Project QKENCHANT; he was
considered the same year for use as a contract agent in Guam, and was
described as "already in liaison with the Agency."
p. 314: The CIA responded to Davy that information on QKENCHANT was
still classified, and they could release no information regarding what
the program was.
And regarding ZRCLIFF:
p. 88: Soldier of Fortune Leslie Norman Bradley considered for
employment as a pilot with ZRCLIFF
p. 297: The CIA has also refused to say what ZRCLIFF was
p. 311: Operations in William Harvey's Staff D (location of ZR projects)
routinely involved "forged and backdated" 201 files.
Martin
Tony Pitman
Snip
So after all of the huffing and puffing, this turns out to be the famous
"documents"? Handwritten notes? "Presumably" by an HSCA staffer? That's
very good isn't it? I'm glad that you and John are satisfied Dave. Since
your main intelligance agency is such an open book you can rest easy. You
know everything there is to know. And dont forget what Jerry has told you
either; "The CIA has never killed anybody." Not a sausage. Clay was as
pure as the driven. Whiter than white.
Tony
Dreitzes
Pardon me, Tony, but would you please answer the following two basic questions:
1. Do you believe Clay Shaw was a CIA agent or employee? If so, please cite the
evidence you find compelling.
2. Do you mean to imply with your sarcasm that Clay Shaw was in any way, shape,
or form, a corrupt individual? If so, please cite the evidence you find
compelling.
Dave Reitzes
Dreitzes
>
>A few bits from William Davy's just-released book, Let Justice Be Done:
>New Light on the Jim Garrison Investigation, regarding QKENCHANT:
>
>p. 195: A document notes that J. Monroe SULLIVAN [at whose Trade Mart
>Clay Shaw spoke on November 22, 1963]
Ah, yes, this was Shaw's "alibi," according to Martin Shackelford.
"was granted a covert security
>approval on 10 December 1962 so that he could be used in Project
>QKENCHANT. SHAW has #402897-A." The "has," present tense, is from the
>document dated March 16, 1967.
>p. 196: "Reference is made to your request for a Covert Security
>Approval on Subject [E. Howard Hunt], dated 3 June 1970, for utilization
>under Project QKENCHANT." Was Hunt an "unwitting" participant in the
>Project? He had the same kind of clearance as Sullivan and Shaw.
Anybody want to explain this one to Mr. Shackelford? I take it he simply
believes that the word "unwitting" associated with Shaw and Sullivan's
involvement was some kind of typo or Agency doublespeak.
Odd that they didn't use such doublespeak for the Agency employee who
apparently was overseeing the project, did they?
Of course, if that person overseeing the project was Howard Hunt, then we KNOW
that something "spooky" was going on, right? Hey, he looks JUST LIKE THAT
"TRAMP," RIGHT???
Still determined to go down with the ship, eh, Martin?
>p. 197: A CIA computer printout sheet:
> /N SHAW,CLAY SR S333959
>
> /A BERTRAND,CLAY /YM
>
> /D SER 1951
>
> /R IW R402897-A 2088478 67
>[Note the 67; same year as the above-quoted QKENCHANT memo.]
Would you mind citing the entire printout, Martin? Or should we just assume
that you're presenting it accurately and in proper context, as you failed to do
with even a single piece of the source material in your Fair Play article?
>p. 200: Another note in the CIA's Shaw file says:
> "Y # file- 33412 destroyed."
>
GASP!!!! I'll bet that was the one where they assigned him to kill Kennedy!!!
>p. 288: On January 12, 1954, Guy Persac Johnson of New Orleans was
>granted a covert security clearance for use in Project QKENCHANT; he was
>considered the same year for use as a contract agent in Guam, and was
>described as "already in liaison with the Agency."
>
>p. 314: The CIA responded to Davy that information on QKENCHANT was
>still classified, and they could release no information regarding what
>the program was.
>
>And regarding ZRCLIFF:
>
>p. 88: Soldier of Fortune Leslie Norman Bradley considered for
>employment as a pilot with ZRCLIFF
>
>p. 297: The CIA has also refused to say what ZRCLIFF was
>
>p. 311: Operations in William Harvey's Staff D (location of ZR projects)
>routinely involved "forged and backdated" 201 files.
>
>Martin
Martin, we all still await your retraction of this assertion from your Fair
Play article:
(quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Another recently-released document connects Shaw to the top secret project
ZRCLIFF, which was run out of William Harvey's super-secret Staff D along with
the ZRRIFLE assassination program.
(end quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Of course, I honestly thought you would remove your Fair Play piece from their
Web site when shown how shamefully misinformed it is.
I don't see what the big deal is, Martin. As Big Jim told us years ago, the
public doesn't read the retractions, only the headlines.
DR
P.S. Repost for anyone who missed it . . .
Martin Shackelford contributed a little item called "Garrison's Case Finally
Coming Together" to Fair Play about six months ago. During those six months, I
have asked Martin numerous times to cite his sources, and he's finally informed
me that he simply can't be bothered; he's gone on "to other things." So I'll
just have to do the best I can reviewing his piece with the information I have
at my disposal.
Shackelford writes:
"In 1969, government secrecy severely hampered the investigation by New Orleans
District Attorney Jim Garrison into the assassination of President Kennedy.
Today, with the documents released under the JFK Records Act, some of that
secrecy has crumbled, and elements of Garrison's case look stronger today than
in 1969."
**************************************************************
Talk about damning with faint praise . . .
**************************************************************
"Perry Raymond Russo, the key witness who described conspiratorial
conversations including the defendant Clay Shaw and the deceased David Ferrie,
maintained the veracity of his testimony until his death in 1995."
***************************************************************
Nonsense; Russo retracted his entire story in a series of tape-recorded
interviews with Clay Shaw's lawyers in 1971. Despite his contributions to the
1991 film, *JFK,* Russo said in several 1993-94 interviews that had he himself
been part of Shaw's jury, he would have voted to acquit (see Patricia Lambert,
*False Witness* and Gerald Posner, *Case Closed*; by the way, whatever my
reservations about Posner, his chapter on Garrison is accurate). [Note:
Posner's section -- in another chapter -- on Garrison's famous "Clinton
witnesses" is unsurprisingly inaccurate and misleading. In Posner's chapter on
the Garrison affair, however, I can only find two very minor factual
inaccuracies.]
***************************************************************
"The case was sabotaged, however, by Garrison's inability to establish
supporting claims that David Ferrie had long known Lee Harvey Oswald, and that
Clay Shaw was connected to the CIA. There is no longer any doubt that both of
these claims are true."
***************************************************************
Apparently Mr. Shackelford is wholly unfamiliar with Garrison's actual case
against Clay Shaw, which did not concern the CIA in any way, shape or form. If
Mr. Shackelford disagrees, I challenge him to cite even a single passage of
testimony from the lengthy Shaw trial transcript or the thousands of
contemporaneous press accounts of the trial in which the prosecution attempted
to either connect Shaw to the CIA or link the CIA to the assassination. The
factoid Shackelford repeats is simply one of Garrison's numerous excuses for
why he had no evidence against Shaw to present at trial.
The case against Shaw also did not depend in any way upon David Ferrie knowing
Lee Harvey Oswald, and one has to wonder what substances Shackelford could have
been imbibing to even give him that impression. Ferrie, of course, was long
dead by the time of the trial, and the jury did not even accept that Shaw
himself knew Ferrie, so what could the relevance of Ferrie's relationship to
Oswald be?
****************************************************************
"As late as 1993, with the publication of Gerald Posner's book Case Closed,
Garrison's critics were denying that David Ferrie was in the Civil Air Patrol
in New Orleans at the same time at Oswald (the mid-1950s), despite contrary
witness testimony. Shortly after the publication of Posner's book, however, the
PBS news program "Frontline" located two photographs showing Ferrie and Oswald
together at a CAP barbecue; one, shown on the program 'Who Was Lee Harvey
Oswald?' has since been widely published."
****************************************************************
According to Edward Voebel, who introduced Oswald to the CAP, Oswald attended
two or three -- four at the most -- meetings of the CAP; Ferrie was clearly
telling the truth when he said he didn't remember Oswald in 1963.
****************************************************************
In addition, former Deputy Counsel Robert Tanenbaum of the House Select
Committee on Assassinations has stated that his staff located a film showing
Oswald and Ferrie at an anti-Castro training camp near New Orleans in the
summer of 1963.
***************************************************************
Shackelford, like Garrison, is apparently not averse to citing nonexistent
evidence; HSCA General Counsel Robert Blakey says if this film ever existed,
nobody at the HSCA ever saw it. Meanwhile, David Blackburst has interviewed the
trainers of the Lake Pontchartrain training camp, who have no recollection of
Oswald, Ferrie or practically any other American ever being at the camp.
Tanenbaum makes all kinds of wild claims; let's see if any of them are ever
substantiated.
****************************************************************
"Clay Shaw's connections to the Central Intelligence Agency are now thoroughly
documented."
***************************************************************
Ah, yes -- "connections." Let's see what sinister "connections" Shackelford
puts forth.
***************************************************************
"Though he told reporters he was in the Medical Corps during World War Two,
documents show that he worked for an Army Counterintelligence group called the
Special Operations Section."
****************************************************************
First of all, this is an example of what is called a non sequitor. Simply put,
implying that service with Army Counterintelligence gives one a connection to
the CIA is like saying that postal workers are part of the US legislature. In
addition, the CIA did not even exist until well after World War II, so
Shackelford's point here seems more than a little obscure.
Second, in the six months or so since this article was published, I have asked
numerous times if anyone can post a citation for this claim. To date, no one
has. Others insist Shaw worked for the OSS -- precursor of the CIA -- during
the war; again, apparently, no one has a primary source to cite.
***************************************************************
"His military record remains classified. In Europe, he became involved with a
Rome-based CIA front organization, the Centro Mondiale Commerciale."
***************************************************************
A left-wing Italian tabloid, *Paese Sera,* charged in 1967 that this
organization was a front for the CIA. In over three decades, no one has
advanced a shred of proof for the claim. In 1983, the British conspiracy
journal *Lobster* ran an interesting article debunking the CIA story as, of all
things, Communist propaganda. Shaw himself had virtually no contact with Centro
Mondiale Commerciale (World Trade Center) in the first place, as he described
to James Phelan in an interview for Penthouse. No one has ever been able to
refute or even cast doubt upon this statement.
At least Shackelford avoids claiming that Permindex was behind the
assassination, a claim originating with the so-called Torbitt document.
Purportedly written by Texas lawyer David Copeland in 1970, this manuscript
cites *Paese Sera* as its source for the allegation, despite the fact that even
*Paese Sera* said no such thing.
***************************************************************
Between 1948 and 1956, he filed reports with the CIA's Domestic Contact
Division,
****************************************************************
Finally -- a grain of truth. Like thousands of US businessmen who traveled
abroad, Shaw was routinely debriefed by the CIA. Eight reports were written
from the information he provided; they concern international trade and are
available at the National Archives.
*****************************************************************
"and provided documents to the Foreign Documents Division."
****************************************************************
I've never seen a source cited for this, but I suppose it could well be true.
****************************************************************
"The CIA paid for one of Shaw's trips in 1955,"
****************************************************************
I've never seen a source cited for this. Seems the Pease-DiEugenio camp would
be crowing about this were it true.
****************************************************************
"and the following year he actively solicited information for them."
****************************************************************
Ditto.
****************************************************************
"Although a CIA internal report described him as a valuable informant, his
formal connection with the Agency suddenly ended in 1956."
***************************************************************
The CIA report in question must have been fairly old; in 1956, it was decided
that Shaw was no longer providing valuable information, and his debriefings
ceased. It could hardly be considered a sudden decision, as Shaw's thirty
debriefings only resulted in eight reports.
***************************************************************
"His CIA activities, though, continued."
***************************************************************
Mr. Shackelford doesn't seem to understand the role of a DCS contact. There
were never any "CIA activities" in Shaw's years as a contact, and there would
be none later. Martin is misrepresenting the facts.
***************************************************************
"The House Select Committee on Assassinations learned, but didn't report, that
Shaw was heavily involved in anti-Castro activities;"
***************************************************************
I suppose Martin's trying to hint at something sinister, but it's difficult to
tell. I happen to have stumbled upon the source to this claim, however, a
source which I must note could hardly possess less credibility. It will be
revealed later in this post.
***************************************************************
"he allowed one group rent-free space in his International Trade Mart."
***************************************************************
What anti-Castro "group" is Mr. Shackelford talking about? He doesn't say. We
know the Trade Mart was home to the Cuban consulate for some time, but I don't
think that qualifies as an anti-Castro group. Anybody have a citation?
***************************************************************
"He had a working relationship with former FBI agent Guy Banister,"
***************************************************************
I'm guessing Mr. Shackelford's source is Bill Davy, who has quoted a few people
as stating that Shaw knew Banister. If true, it means little or nothing, and
there's no reason to even believe it's true.
***************************************************************
"many of whose former employees now confirm that Banister employed Oswald in
the summer of 1963."
***************************************************************
"Many"? I can think of two former Banister employees who claimed to the HSCA
that Oswald may have been working for Banister, though neither said anything
about it for years following the assassination. Jack Martin told Garrison that
Oswald hung around Banister's office a lot in 1963, but Martin didn't mention
this to anyone in 1963, although he was quite vocal about *suspecting* that
Banister investigator David Ferrie knew Oswald. Why did he think this? Because
he heard on television that Oswald had briefly belonged to the Civil Air
Patrol, and Martin knew Ferrie had been involved with the CAP. Had Martin
actually seen Oswald at Banister's office, one would expect him to have
remembered it during the numerous times he was questioned in 1963; instead he
theorized that Ferrie, an amateur hypnotist, could have made a programmed
assassin of Oswald. Delphine Roberts is another former Banister employee who
says Oswald was around Banister's office quite a bit. She was questioned by
Garrison's staff in 1967, however, and did not say anything about knowing
Oswald. Her story underwent a change over a decade later. She also has said at
various times that she met Oswald's wife and/or mother. (Marina Oswald denies
this and Marguerite Oswald was in Fort Worth, Texas in 1963.) (A third Banister
employee, Daniel Campbell, told Anthony Summers he saw Oswald in Banister's
office once, though not in Banister's company.)
***************************************************************
"As late as 1967, Shaw had a 'covert security' classification for a top secret
program called QKENCHANT. The program remains so highly classified that we are
still unable to learn anything about its nature, but Shaw's classification was
approved by the CIA's then covert operations chief, Richard Helms, and we know
that clearances were being granted in December 1962. Former CIA official Victor
Marchetti said that QKENCHANT was most likely run out of the Domestic
Operations Division of the Clandestine Services, run by Tracy Barnes. Support
for this comes from recently-released documents identifying Barnes'
then-deputy, E. Howard Hunt, as another individual involved with QKENCHANT. We
also know that a pilot was considered for clearance for the program. One of the
few others known to have been cleared for QKENCHANT was Monroe Sullivan,
director of the San Francisco Trade Mart, and Shaw's alibi witness for November
22, 1963."
****************************************************************
This was debunked before Martin had even gotten around to writing about it.
Shaw did not have a "covert security" classification for anything. The document
in question says that Shaw was "granted covert security approval for use under
Project QK/ENCHANT on an unwitting basis" -- just like Monroe Sullivan, another
unwitting source who affirmed to Patricia Lambert recently that he never worked
for the CIA. As for Marchetti's claim about this being a DOD operation, it's
about as reliable as his onetime claim that a CIA 201 file was proof of one's
status as a CIA contract agent. (It's not.)
With a reference to Sullivan as Shaw's "alibi witness," we begin to abandon
planet Earth altogether. Since even Garrison was never loopy enough to accuse
Shaw of being a gunman in Dealey Plaza, whatever would Shaw need an "alibi
witness" for?
****************************************************************
"At the time of the House Select Committee investigation in 1976, inquiries to
the CIA about Clay Shaw were coordinated by J. Walton Moore, the former Dallas
CIA contact for Oswald's friend George DeMohrenschildt."
****************************************************************
It's not clear what Shackelford is trying to say here. (Source? Who knows?) J.
Walton Moore was with DCS, so one might expect him to handle inquiries about a
former contact. His onetime relationship with De Mohrenschildt is Shackelford's
way of injecting intrigue into a fact that has none of its own. (Does
Shackelford actually believe De Mohrenschildt had something to do with the
assassination?)
***************************************************************
"Another recently-released document connects Shaw to the top secret project
ZRCLIFF, which was run out of William Harvey's super-secret Staff D along with
the ZRRIFLE assassination program."
***************************************************************
I've asked Martin repeatedly to cite his source for this assertion, and he has
invariably refused. On May 25, 1999, Martin posted what I have to presume is
his final word on the subject:
>And regarding ZRCLIFF:
>
>[Bill Davy, *Let Justice Be Done,*] p. 88: Soldier of Fortune Leslie Norman
Bradley considered for
>employment as a pilot with ZRCLIFF
>
>p. 297: The CIA has also refused to say what ZRCLIFF was
***************************************************************
"In February 1967, New Orleans CIA office Chief Lloyd Ray wrote to the Director
of the CIA's Domestic Contact Service: 'We believe that there is some truth in
the allegation of the Garrison investigation and the matter is under a discreet
and sensitive investigation by the FBI.'"
***************************************************************
How interesting. Well, the world found out in February 1969 that there was no
truth to anything Garrison ever alleged about Clay Shaw, so I can't say why
Shackelford finds Mr. Ray's speculation of any value to us now. Since Shaw was
not arrested -- or even known to be a Garrison suspect -- until March 1, 1967,
one would assume that Mr. Ray's comment of February 1967 refers to the
multitude of press reports being generated by Garrison's newly public
investigation, not anything related to Shaw. Mr. Ray was employed by DCS, a
branch of the CIA far removed from the infamous "black ops" of the clandestine
affairs bunch, so one wonders what he might have known about the Kennedy
assassination even if the CIA were behind it.
****************************************************************
"A September 1977 memo written by HSCA staff counsel Jonathan Blackmer
concluded: 'We have reason to believe Shaw was heavily involved in the
anti-Castro efforts in New Orleans in the 1960s and possibly one of the
high-level planners or 'cut out' to the planners of the assassination.'"
****************************************************************
Last, and very possibly least, is a joke that Shackelford manages somehow to
deliver with a straight face. Anyone care to guess what Shackelford's source
is? Well, just because I had to guess at Martin's sources, that's no reason you
should have to: It's a September 1, 1977, memo reporting on the HSCA's
interview with none other than Big Jim Garrison himself.
Some examples of the assertions recorded by Blackmer: "Shaw was a former high
ranking CIA operative in Italy, and according to Garrison, a contract employee
in the New Orleans area from the late 1950's until his death in the early
1970's." Notice that Blackmer does not distinguish between the veracity or
reliability of these two statements (Shaw never even resided in Italy, much
less was a "high ranking CIA operative" -- something of an oxymoron -- there),
though he only credits the second explicitly to Garrison. Another example is
the note that "Shaw was the 'queen bee' of the homosexual element of the New
Orleans operation, using the alias of 'Clay or Clem Bertrand.'" This again
would seem to represent Garrison's opinion, not Blackmer's.
So when the same report states, "We have reason to believe Shaw was heavily
involved in the anti-Castro efforts in New Orleans in the 1960s and possibly
one of the high-level planners or 'cut out' to the planners of the
assassination," whose opinion do YOU think is being relayed? Hint: The HSCA
never developed a stitch of evidence implicating Clay Shaw in the
assassination. Shackelford should know better than to try to pass this off as
evidence of anything.
Of course, that would seem to apply to every one of the assertions Shackelford
makes in his misguided attempt to rehabilitate Jim Garrison's fraudulent "case"
against Clay Shaw.
Dave Reitzes
jpsh...@my-dejanews.com
msh...@concentric.net wrote:
> A few bits from William Davy's just-released book, Let Justice Be Done:
> New Light on the Jim Garrison Investigation, regarding QKENCHANT:
>
> p. 195: A document notes that J. Monroe SULLIVAN [at whose Trade Mart
> approval on 10 December 1962 so that he could be used in Project
> document dated March 16, 1967.
> p. 196: "Reference is made to your request for a Covert Security
> Approval on Subject [E. Howard Hunt], dated 3 June 1970, for utilization
> under Project QKENCHANT." Was Hunt an "unwitting" participant in the
> Project? He had the same kind of clearance as Sullivan and Shaw.
> /N SHAW,CLAY SR S333959
>
> /A BERTRAND,CLAY /YM
>
> /D SER 1951
>
> /R IW R402897-A 2088478 67
> [Note the 67; same year as the above-quoted QKENCHANT memo.]
>
> "Y # file- 33412 destroyed."
>
> granted a covert security clearance for use in Project QKENCHANT; he was
> considered the same year for use as a contract agent in Guam, and was
> described as "already in liaison with the Agency."
>
-
New York Times Feb 8, 1971 P36
Guy Johnson, 85, Type Exporter
Head of Company Dealing in Printing Gear Dies
-
Guy D. Johnson, president of Guy D. Johnson, Inc., exporters of
printing equipment, died at his home yesterday. He was 85 years old
and lived at 969 Park Avenue.
Mr. Johnson was born in New Orleans on Oct. 8, 1885. He spent
three years in railroad work in Central America before joining
National Paper and Type Company, a printing equipment exporter in
1907.
He spent 45 years with that company, serving as president from
1945 to 1953. In the latter year he organized his own company, in
which he had been active until recently.
Mr. Johnson had traveled extensively in Latin America, selling
printing equipment, and was well known as an authority in graphic
arts.
He was a founder of the Southern Cross Club of this city, and a
member of the Metropolitan Club.
He leaves his wife, the former Helene Perez, and two children
of an earlier marriage, Mrs. Elizabeth J. MacKenzie, and Guy D.
Johnson, Jr., five grand children and a great-grandson.
[...]
>
> p. 314: The CIA responded to Davy that information on QKENCHANT was
> still classified, and they could release no information regarding what
> the program was.
>
> And regarding ZRCLIFF:
>
> p. 88: Soldier of Fortune Leslie Norman Bradley considered for
> employment as a pilot with ZRCLIFF
>
> p. 297: The CIA has also refused to say what ZRCLIFF was
>
> p. 311: Operations in William Harvey's Staff D (location of ZR projects)
> routinely involved "forged and backdated" 201 files.
>
> Martin
>
>
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
John McAdams
>A few bits from William Davy's just-released book, Let Justice Be Done:
>New Light on the Jim Garrison Investigation, regarding QKENCHANT:
>
>
>And regarding ZRCLIFF:
>
>p. 88: Soldier of Fortune Leslie Norman Bradley considered for
>employment as a pilot with ZRCLIFF
>
>p. 297: The CIA has also refused to say what ZRCLIFF was
>
>p. 311: Operations in William Harvey's Staff D (location of ZR projects)
>routinely involved "forged and backdated" 201 files.
>
But what evidence ties Shaw to ZR/CLIFF?
You've been citing this phanton document, but you won't post it, and
nobody else will either.
If the supposed document really showed what it's supposed to show,
don't you imagine that some of the Garrisonites here would have posted
it by now? *Lisa* has access to PROBE, for heaven's sake, and
Garrisonites here are in touch with Bill Davy.
Doesn't it make you suspicious that the evidence isn't forthcoming?
I remember going through a charade just like this with the Mercy
Hospital "truth serum" session of Perry Russo. The Garrisonites had
the document, but they *concealed* it. They gave it to a few trusted
people, and made them promise not to let it go further.
Not surprisingly, when I got my hands on it and posted it, it blew
Russo's credibility entirely out of the water.
A little skepticism would be in order Martin. You won't believe the
government just on their say-so. Why believe the PROBE crowd?
.John
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Martin Shackelford
interested in what Bill Davy offers on points that have been discussed
here.
Martin
John McAdams wrote:
--
Tony Pitman
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
Yeah,
That whole thing was a bit strange.
I think that document has got to be innaccurate.
It just does not make sense to use Pentothal for this purpose I dont
think.
I recall waking up while still in an operating theater one time and
they were just finishing with stitching me up or something. And there
was this beautiful nurse (I'm fairly sure she was beautiful) standing
right beside my head where I lay on the trolley thing. Well what I
remember is that I felt very good and next thing they were having to
prise her out of my arms. I had her in a clinch just below waist level
you see.
But it was more of a mischievous fun kind of thing and I dont think
the stuff would get you telling the truth. You would also have to be
kept at a sort of just awake level with an anaethsetist constantly
trying to control this in case you went to sleep.
There must have been more suitable drugs for this purpose. People
mention scopolamine but even that should have been improved upon by
the late sixties. I'm not so sure that it was much good either.
Tony
Dreitzes
>
John McAdams wrote:
>>> I remember going through a charade just like this with the Mercy
>>> Hospital "truth serum" session of Perry Russo. The Garrisonites had
>>> the document, but they *concealed* it. They gave it to a few trusted
>>> people, and made them promise not to let it go further.
>>>
>>> Not surprisingly, when I got my hands on it and posted it, it blew
>>> Russo's credibility entirely out of the water.
>>>
>>> A little skepticism would be in order Martin. You won't believe the
>>> government just on their say-so. Why believe the PROBE crowd?
>>>
>>> .John
>
>
>Yeah,
>
>That whole thing was a bit strange.
>I think that document has got to be innaccurate.
\:^) Tony DOES NOT BELIEVE Garrison used sodium Pentothal on Perry Raymond
Russo.
Tony can't OPEN GARRISON'S MEMOIRS to, say, page 177 of the 1991 paperback
edition and educate himself.
>It just does not make sense to use Pentothal for this purpose I dont
>think.
Despite the fact that I've GIVEN TONY CITATIONS about this so-called "truth
serum" that Garrison freely admitted he used on Perry Raymond Russo.
>I recall waking up while still in an operating theater one time and
>they were just finishing with stitching me up or something. And there
>was this beautiful nurse (I'm fairly sure she was beautiful) standing
>right beside my head where I lay on the trolley thing. Well what I
>remember is that I felt very good and next thing they were having to
>prise her out of my arms. I had her in a clinch just below waist level
>you see.
>But it was more of a mischievous fun kind of thing and I dont think
>the stuff would get you telling the truth.
AND I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO BOTHER LOOKING IN GARRISON'S BOOK, BECAUSE THE CIA
AND THE MOSSAD PROBABLY PLANTED FALSE INFORMATION THERE ANYWAY.
You would also have to be
>kept at a sort of just awake level with an anaethsetist constantly
>trying to control this in case you went to sleep.
>There must have been more suitable drugs for this purpose. People
>mention scopolamine but even that should have been improved upon by
>the late sixties. I'm not so sure that it was much good either.
>
>
>Tony
I wonder how Tony explains Perry Russo's first-person account of his Pentothal
session, the one I posted and to which Tony responded, saying more or less the
same thing he says above.
Denial -- it ain't just a river in Egypt!
DR
Lisa Pease
Why hasn't McAdams bothered to obtain the document referenced below? The
full cititation is available in Bill Davy's book.
But of course, it's easier to deal in innuendo than reality, when the truth
isn't on one's side.
Martin Shackelford wrote in message <374F6BF0...@concentric.net>...
>The post wasn't a Confession of Faith, John. I thought people might be
>interested in what Bill Davy offers on points that have been discussed
>here.
>
>Martin
>
>John McAdams wrote:
>
>> On 24 May 1999 22:28:59 PDT, mshack <msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>>
>> >A few bits from William Davy's just-released book, Let Justice Be Done:
>> >New Light on the Jim Garrison Investigation, regarding QKENCHANT:
>> >
>> >
>> >And regarding ZRCLIFF:
>> >
>> >p. 88: Soldier of Fortune Leslie Norman Bradley considered for
>> >employment as a pilot with ZRCLIFF
>> >
>> >p. 297: The CIA has also refused to say what ZRCLIFF was
>> >
>> >p. 311: Operations in William Harvey's Staff D (location of ZR projects)
>> >routinely involved "forged and backdated" 201 files.
>> >
>>
>> But what evidence ties Shaw to ZR/CLIFF?
>>
>> You've been citing this phanton document, but you won't post it, and
>> nobody else will either.
>>
>> If the supposed document really showed what it's supposed to show,
>> don't you imagine that some of the Garrisonites here would have posted
>> it by now? *Lisa* has access to PROBE, for heaven's sake, and
>> Garrisonites here are in touch with Bill Davy.
>>
>> Doesn't it make you suspicious that the evidence isn't forthcoming?
>>
>> I remember going through a charade just like this with the Mercy
>> Hospital "truth serum" session of Perry Russo. The Garrisonites had
>> the document, but they *concealed* it. They gave it to a few trusted
>> people, and made them promise not to let it go further.
>>
>> Not surprisingly, when I got my hands on it and posted it, it blew
>> Russo's credibility entirely out of the water.
>>
>> A little skepticism would be in order Martin. You won't believe the
>> government just on their say-so. Why believe the PROBE crowd?
>>
>> .John
>>
>>
Dave Reitzes
Subject: Clay Shaw, ZR/CLIFF, Perry Russo & Lisa Pease
From: drei...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)
Date: Fri, 11 June 1999 04:44 PM EDT
Message-id: <19990611164406...@ng-fj1.aol.com>
John McAdams wrote to Martin Shackelford:
> But what evidence ties Shaw to ZR/CLIFF?
>
> You've been citing this phanton document, but you won't post it, and nobody
> else will either.
>
> If the supposed document really showed what it's supposed to show, don't you
> imagine that some of the Garrisonites here would have posted it by now?
> *Lisa* has access to PROBE, for heaven's sake, and
> Garrisonites here are in touch with Bill Davy.
>
> Doesn't it make you suspicious that the evidence isn't forthcoming?
>
> I remember going through a charade just like this with the Mercy Hospital
> "truth serum" session of Perry Russo. The Garrisonites had the document,
> but they *concealed* it. They gave it to a few trusted people, and made
> them promise not to let it go further.
>
> Not surprisingly, when I got my hands on it and posted it, it blew Russo's
> credibility entirely out of the water.
>
> A little skepticism would be in order Martin. You won't believe the
> government just on their say-so. Why believe the PROBE crowd?
>
> .John
Lisa Pease responded:
> Subject: ZR/Cliff and Another McAdams lie
> Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 05:23:26 GMT
> From: "Lisa Pease" <lpe...@StopSpamgte.net>
>
>.John's FIRST lie is that Russo's hypnosis session wasn't made available.
> The relevant portions were posted on my web site since the time of my first
> post about it. Anyone could read it and see how clearly Russo ID'd Shaw
> without being led by the hypnotist. It's still on my site, and I encourage
> anyone unfamiliar with this portion of the story to check it out
> (www.RealHistoryArchives.com).
>
> .John's SECOND lie is the implication that 1) I even read his posts (caught
> this one on a fluke visit - I hardly come here but once every two months),
> and 2) that because something hasn't been posted in this garbage forum that
> it doesn't exist. What baloney - and further evidence of why most serious
> researchers have long ago stopped visiting this place.
>
> Bill Davy cites the exact document number for the ZRCLIFF document, which
> states that Shaw was considered for use in the program. But if .John was a
> REAL researcher, he would have long ago found this out.
>
> He's not. He's just a disinformationist, eager to persuade any idiot who
> would actually believe him that Shaw was an innocent, uninvolved party. I'm
> only halfway through Davy's incredible new book (see www.webcom.com/ctka and
> click the link to Davy's page) and the evidence of Shaw's heavy involvement
> with the assassination plotters is quite impressive. Kudos, Bill - not that
> he wastes his time here either! :) I'll tell him in private.
>
> Anyway - McAdams stands corrected, YET AGAIN. Yawn.
Goodness! More fun from the people who brought us the QK/ENCHANT fiasco, in
which it was alleged that Shaw's unwitting use as a source of DCS information
somehow made him a clandestine operative of the CIA.
The following is the basis for Lisa Pease and Martin Shackelford's claim about
ZR/CLIFF and Clay Shaw.
Bill Davy writes that freelance pilot Leslie Norman Bradley was once considered
for a CIA operation called ZR/CLIFF, "but for unknown reasons the offer of
employment was withdrawn" (Davy, Let Justice Be Done, 88; citing CIA memo,
March 3, 1967, author unknown. Document id #1993.06.28.15:29:52:780280, JFK Box
# JFK1, Volume F, Folder 7).
Davy then notes that a Houston man named Sam Kouffroth told the FBI that he'd
once asked Leslie Norman Bradley "how he had been making a living since being
released from the Cuban prison and he replied that it was pretty rough but that
Clay Shaw of the International House was 'helping us'" (Davy, 88-9).
Any questions?
Now, let's back up.
>.John's FIRST lie is that Russo's hypnosis session wasn't made available.
> The relevant portions were posted on my web site since the time of my first
> post about it. Anyone could read it and see how clearly Russo ID'd Shaw
> without being led by the hypnotist. It's still on my site, and I encourage
> anyone unfamiliar with this portion of the story to check it out
> (www.RealHistoryArchives.com).
Lisa isn't being very clear about these documents. Allow me to clarify.
First, there is the Andrew Sciambra memorandum titled "Interview with Perry
Russo at Mercy Hospital on Feb. 27, 1967." Perry Raymond Russo was interrogated
under the influence of sodium Pentothal in the emergency room operating ward at
Mercy Hospital on February 27, 1967. Sodium Pentothal was administered by
Coroner Nicholas Chetta, with Assistant DA Andrew Sciambra conducting the
interrogation and Assistant DA Alvin Oser taking notes. Sciambra prepared a
memorandum the following day.
Perry Russo was first interrogated under the influence of hypnosis -- not to be
confused with the use of sodium Pentothal -- by Dr. Esmond Fatter and Andrew
Sciambra on March 1, 1967. This interrogation took place in the office of
Coroner Nicholas Chetta. The transcript is labeled "First Hypnotic Session,
Exhibit F." Strangely, this can be found at Lisa Pease's Real History site at
the link called, "Text culled from the transcript of Russo's second hypnosis
session." The reason for this will be explained below.
Perry Russo was again interrogated under the influence of hypnosis, this time
in Assistant DA Charles Ward's office, on March 9, 1967. No transcript is known
to exist.
Perry Russo was interrogated again under the influence of hypnosis on March 12,
1967. This took place in Coroner Chetta's office, and the transcript is labeled
"2nd Hypnotic Session, Exhibit G." Lisa Pease's Real History site has a portion
of this transcript at a link marked, "Text culled from the transcript of
Russo's first hypnosis session." Again, the reason for this will be explained
below.
Perry Russo told Patricia Lambert in 1994 that he may have been hypnotized as
many as five times, though only the March 1 and March 12 transcripts are known
to exist.
Lisa Pease's Real History site offers students of the assassination links to
these four items:
(quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Text culled from the transcript of Russo's first [sic] hypnosis session
Text culled from the transcript of Russo's second [sic] hypnosis session
Sequence of Events Relating to Perry Russo
Text and Testimony relating to the two Sciambra Memos
(end quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I do not see a link to the transcript of "Interview with Perry Russo at Mercy
Hospital on Feb. 27, 1967."
So when Lisa Pease states that . . .
>.John's FIRST lie is that Russo's hypnosis session wasn't made available.
> The relevant portions were posted on my web site since the time of my first
> post about it.
. . . she seems to be confusing the record.
John McAdams wrote:
> I remember going through a charade just like this with the Mercy Hospital
> "truth serum" session of Perry Russo. The Garrisonites had the document,
> but they *concealed* it. They gave it to a few trusted people, and made
> them promise not to let it go further.
>
> Not surprisingly, when I got my hands on it and posted it, it blew Russo's
> credibility entirely out of the water.
The item John mentioned does not seem to be available on Lisa's Web site. It
is, however, available at John McAdams' Web site:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russo3.txt
An interesting sidenote to this affair concerns "a transcript of a statement
Perry Russo made under hypnosis. Garrison turned this document over the House
Select Committee in 1977 with a notation. Explaining why the pages were
numbered oddly (one to seventeen and one to thirteen), Garrison wrote that the
session was in parts because Dr. Fatter had apparently 'interposed' a 'break'
or 'rest period' for Russo's benefit. He did not. Garrison's 'document' is
actually two documents, the transcript of the first hypnosis session and
another, which took place eleven days later. Garrison combined them, reversing
their chronology, and labeled them 'A' and 'B'" (Patricia Lambert, *False
Witness,* 254-5).
The HSCA thus was led to believe that the March 12, 1967, session occurred
before the March 1, 1967, session. That is why Lisa Pease's Real History site
has the two sessions in the wrong order to this day. All of the above can be
verified at the National Archives.
Perry Russo described his experience with sodium Pentothal in this way:
(quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
He recalled lying on a table, the needle inserted into his right arm, as a
"clear substance" was administered, which he thought took about ten minutes,
and he felt nothing out of the ordinary. Then the Pentothal bottle was attached
and Russo reacted instantly. "My head started spinning round and round --
things started closing in on me and tightening up and I started getting violent
and upset." "I knew I was upset," he said. "I recall being bothered -- I didn't
want to be bothered, didn't want anybody to touch me and I didn't want anybody
close to me." At first "the doctors were holding me down." Then "I felt like I
was kicking at them." He became violent and had to be physically restrained.
"It seemed like they strapped my whole body, they strapped the right arm down
and they held the left arm . . . and they strapped me around the waist and
around the legs." "I just kept swinging and twisting and squirming away" and
"the needle came out once, at least, maybe more." "That's when they strapped me
down." "Oser . . . was holding me down right at the waist. He's big!" "He just
physically got on top of me and I kept saying, I remember saying, 'Get away you
mother fuckers, get away,' and I kicked at them and I was swinging at them."
After the session was over, Russo was unstrapped. But when he tried to stand
up, he couldn't. "I started to fall down," he said. He was "dizzy"; "had to
hold on to something" and was "sick" for "a couple of hours." He also felt
abandoned by Sciambra and the others. "Everybody was interested in going,"
Russo said. "They all left." "I felt like I was dropped like a coot" (Patricia
Lambert, *False Witness,* 72-3)
(end quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Before this sodium Pentothal-induced interrogation, Perry Russo had never
mentioned a "Clay" or "Clem Bertrand," had never claimed to have met Clay Shaw
(under any name) and had never described an alleged "assassination plot" with
Shaw, Ferrie and a "Leon Oswald." All of this came out during the sodium
Pentathol-induced interview session, as Russo was asked a number of leading
questions about "Clay Bertrand," "Leon Oswald" and a party where something
important was being discussed.
Though Russo testified that he had described "Bertrand" and the "assassination
plot" to Andrew Sciambra during their first interview of February 25, 1967, in
Baton Rouge, Russo had previously admitted to journalist James Phelan and
photographer Matt Herron that he did not mention "Bertrand" or any
"assassination plot" until his interrogation at Mercy Hospital in New Orleans.
Of course, if Russo mentioned "Bertrand" or an "assassination plot" on February
25, 1967, Andrew Sciambra omitted the topics from his memorandum of that
interview.
Russo again admitted this in 1971, when he voluntarily gave a series of
tape-recorded interviews to Clay Shaw's defense lawyers, in which he confessed
that his entire story had emerged from his interrogation sessions under the
influence of first sodium Pentothal and then hypnosis. He reaffirmed this in
later interviews, including with Patricia Lambert in 1994.
Even AFTER the Mercy Hospital sodium Pentothal interrogation -- none of which
Russo remembered after the Pentothal wore off -- Russo STILL denied to Richard
Billings and Jim Garrison that he knew anyone named "Bertrand." Garrison
shrugged it off as a "side effect" of the drug.
See Patricia Lambert's *False Witness* for the entire story, a story which can
be verified through an independent review of the primary source documents.
> Anyway - McAdams stands corrected, YET AGAIN. Yawn.
Dave Reitzes
For more information on Jim Garrison and the subjects of his investigation,
please see:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/garrison.htm
For my article "Who Speaks for Clay Shaw?" please see:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/shaw1.htm
For my new article on Garrison's Clinton, La., witnesses, please see:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/clinton1.htm
Lisa Pease
: Perry Russo was first interrogated under the influence of hypnosis -- not to be
: confused with the use of sodium Pentothal -- by Dr. Esmond Fatter and Andrew
: Sciambra on March 1, 1967. This interrogation took place in the office of
: Coroner Nicholas Chetta. The transcript is labeled "First Hypnotic Session,
: Exhibit F." Strangely, this can be found at Lisa Pease's Real History site at
: the link called, "Text culled from the transcript of Russo's second hypnosis
: session." The reason for this will be explained below.
The sessions are clearly labeled in the original documents "A" and "B".
One would assume that "A" comes before "B".
That someone has now falsely mislabeled these and reversed the original
order is quite interesting, and this is the first I have heard of it.
Anyone who reads the two in sequence can clearly see that B follows A.
No. Let me clarify that.
Anyone HONEST.
: another, which took place eleven days later. Garrison combined them, reversing
: their chronology, and labeled them 'A' and 'B'" (Patricia Lambert, *False
: Witness,* 254-5).
This is a lie. That Lambert prints it does not make it true. As I said -
anyone with half a brain who is honest can read both in full and see
clearly which came first and which came second. It's an easy thing to do.
I'd be happy to provide full copies to anyone honest. Dave Reitzes,
McAdams, and many others here naturally need not apply.
: The HSCA thus was led to believe that the March 12, 1967, session occurred
: before the March 1, 1967, session. That is why Lisa Pease's Real History site
: has the two sessions in the wrong order to this day. All of the above can be
: verified at the National Archives.
This is an amazing distortion of the record that the intellectually and
historically dishonest Lambert is trying to make official history.
Funny how it took a few years to come up with this "solution."
But predictable that Reitzes and McAdams, the prime purveyors of
disinformation in this forum, would seize upon this. How incredible -
rewriting history before our eyes!
--
Lisa Pease
"Human history becomes more and more a
race between education and catastrophe."
- H. G. Wells
Real History Archives: www.RealHistoryArchives.com
Probe/CTKA: www.webcom.com/ctka
Lisa Pease
: Goodness! More fun from the people who brought us the QK/ENCHANT fiasco, in
: which it was alleged that Shaw's unwitting use as a source of DCS information
: somehow made him a clandestine operative of the CIA.
Yet another lie from Reitzes.
Please cite anywhere that I or CTKA ever "alleged" that "Shaw's unwitting
use as a source of DCS information somehow made him a clandestine operative."
Lie #1: I never said any such thing.
Lie #2: Shaw was QUITE witting in his work for the CIA, and offered to do
more. See his contact reports from the fifties.
Lie #3: His clearance for QK/ENCHANT was not related to the domestic
contacts division. The CIA has not revealed what this project was, but
Guy Johnson and E. Howard Hunt also had clearance for it.
The point was that Shaw KNOWINGLY lied on the stand when he denied ever
having worked "for or with" the CIA.
: The following is the basis for Lisa Pease and Martin Shackelford's claim about
: ZR/CLIFF and Clay Shaw.
Lie #4: Neither I nor Martin have made a claim about ZR/Cliff and Clay
Shaw. What we have both noted, however, is that the CIA had a document
that made the connection, and that the Bill Davy's book, which had been
previously excerpted in Probe, had the reference to this.
: Bill Davy writes that freelance pilot Leslie Norman Bradley was once considered
: for a CIA operation called ZR/CLIFF, "but for unknown reasons the offer of
: employment was withdrawn" (Davy, Let Justice Be Done, 88; citing CIA memo,
: March 3, 1967, author unknown. Document id #1993.06.28.15:29:52:780280, JFK Box
: # JFK1, Volume F, Folder 7).
--
jpsh...@my-deja.com
lpe...@netcom.com (Lisa Pease) wrote:
> Dave Reitzes (drei...@aol.com) wrote:
>
> : Goodness! More fun from the people who brought us the QK/ENCHANT fiasco, in
> : which it was alleged that Shaw's unwitting use as a source of DCS information
> : somehow made him a clandestine operative of the CIA.
>
>
> use as a source of DCS information somehow made him a clandestine operative."
>
> Lie #1: I never said any such thing.
>
> Lie #2: Shaw was QUITE witting in his work for the CIA, and offered to do
> more. See his contact reports from the fifties.
>
> Lie #3: His clearance for QK/ENCHANT was not related to the domestic
> contacts division. The CIA has not revealed what this project was, but
> Guy Johnson and E. Howard Hunt also had clearance for it.
>
-
New York Times Feb 8, 1971 P36
Guy Johnson, 85, Type Exporter
Head of Company Dealing in Printing Gear Dies
-
Guy D. Johnson, president of Guy D. Johnson, Inc., exporters of
printing equipment, died at his home yesterday. He was 85 years old
and lived at 969 Park Avenue.
Mr. Johnson was born in New Orleans on Oct. 8, 1885. He spent
three years in railroad work in Central America before joining
National Paper and Type Company, a printing equipment exporter in
1907.
He spent 45 years with that company, serving as president from
1945 to 1953. In the latter year he organized his own company, in
which he had been active until recently.
Mr. Johnson had traveled extensively in Latin America, selling
printing equipment, and was well known as an authority in graphic
arts.
He was a founder of the Southern Cross Club of this city, and a
member of the Metropolitan Club.
He leaves his wife, the former Helene Perez, and two children
of an earlier marriage, Mrs. Elizabeth J. MacKenzie, and Guy D.
Johnson, Jr., five grand children and a great-grandson.
[...]
>
>
> : The following is the basis for Lisa Pease and Martin Shackelford's claim about
> : ZR/CLIFF and Clay Shaw.
>
> Shaw. What we have both noted, however, is that the CIA had a document
> that made the connection, and that the Bill Davy's book, which had been
> previously excerpted in Probe, had the reference to this.
>
> : for a CIA operation called ZR/CLIFF, "but for unknown reasons the offer of
> : employment was withdrawn" (Davy, Let Justice Be Done, 88; citing CIA memo,
> : March 3, 1967, author unknown. Document id #1993.06.28.15:29:52:780280, JFK Box
> : # JFK1, Volume F, Folder 7).
>
> Lisa Pease
>
> "Human history becomes more and more a
> race between education and catastrophe."
>
> - H. G. Wells
>
> Real History Archives: www.RealHistoryArchives.com
>
> Probe/CTKA: www.webcom.com/ctka
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Vern Pascal
..Doesn't sound like the same Guy....... pun intended to me..Jeff
jpsh...@my-deja.com
lazu...@webtv.net (Vern Pascal) wrote:
> Johnson was Naval Intelligence and a Lawyer
> ..Doesn't sound like the same Guy....... pun intended to me..Jeff
>
>
was not the Guy Johnson cleared for QK/ENCHANT - I won't argue with
you. However, consider the following:
-
William Davy. Let Justice Be Done. p. 288
-
43. [Guy] Johnson background information taken from CIA memo by
Marguerite D. Stevens to Deputy Chief, SRS, dated September 12, 1967.
document number unknown, released in 1993.
44. Indeed Johnson may have been involved in a covert CIA project.
According to the above referenced CIA memo, a "second" Guy Johnson,
also from New Orleans, was granted a covert security clearance
on January 12, 1954. The clearance was required for Johnson's
use in a project codenamed QK/ENCHANT [...]
-
<end of Davy excerpt>
-
[NO Lawyer Guy Johnson was] "possibly related to Guy Johnson--granted
Covert Security Clearance Jan 12, 1954 for project QKENCHANT. PDOB
10/8/1885, NO, LA, President Nat'l Paper & Type Co. until 1954.
Worked in Central & S. America."
(RIF 180-10143-10220; HSCA Staffer's Handwritten notes on CIA files)
-
<end of excerpt>
-
New York Times Feb 8, 1971 P36
Guy Johnson, 85, Type Exporter
Head of Company Dealing in Printing Gear Dies
-
Guy D. Johnson, president of Guy D. Johnson, Inc., exporters of
printing equipment, died at his home yesterday. He was 85 years old
and lived at 969 Park Avenue.
Mr. Johnson was born in New Orleans on Oct. 8, 1885. He spent
three years in railroad work in Central America before joining
National Paper and Type Company, a printing equipment exporter in
1907.
He spent 45 years with that company, serving as president from
1945 to 1953. In the latter year he organized his own company, in
which he had been active until recently.
Mr. Johnson had traveled extensively in Latin America, selling
printing equipment, and was well known as an authority in graphic
arts.
He was a founder of the Southern Cross Club of this city, and a
member of the Metropolitan Club.
He leaves his wife, the former Helene Perez, and two children
of an earlier marriage, Mrs. Elizabeth J. MacKenzie, and Guy D.
Johnson, Jr., five grand children and a great-grandson.
[...]
<end of excerpt>
-
Lawyer Johnson's obituary notes that "in recent years, [Jim]
Garrison and Mr. Johnson were law partners." (New Orleans
Times-Picayune; January 20, 1976; s 1, p 8) This suggests to me that
Garrison didn't take his own theories very seriously.
-
Dave Reitzes
>
>Dave Reitzes (drei...@aol.com) wrote:
>
>
>: Goodness! More fun from the people who brought us the QK/ENCHANT fiasco, in
>: which it was alleged that Shaw's unwitting use as a source of DCS
>information
>: somehow made him a clandestine operative of the CIA.
>
>
>Yet another lie from Reitzes.
>
>Please cite anywhere that I or CTKA ever "alleged" that "Shaw's unwitting
>use as a source of DCS information somehow made him a clandestine operative."
>
>Lie #1: I never said any such thing.
>
Lisa is engaging in a lawyer's game. She knows that she's never acknowledged
that the documents in question only refer to Shaw's unwitting use as a part of
this operation (yes, the word "unwitting" is right there in the document), so
naturally, she can claim not to have said ANYTHING about Shaw's unwitting use.
Clever, huh?
Funny how the people who shout the loudest about honesty tend to be the ones
who don't seem to have the foggiest idea what the term means.
>Lie #2: Shaw was QUITE witting in his work for the CIA, and offered to do
>more. See his contact reports from the fifties.
Here Lisa is engaging in another lawyer's game. She knows that it is only the
operation QK/ENCHANT that I was referring to with regard to unwitting use of
Shaw, since that is the one and only CIA operation we have any knowledge of
that utilized Shaw as an unwitting source of information. Lisa is well aware
that there has never been any doubt that Shaw was quite "witting" when he
supplied the Domestic Contacts Service with information about his international
travels and contacts. So by conflating these two issues, Lisa would like to
lead you to believe that I am lying about these facts.
But it is Lisa who cannot seem to present the facts accurately. WIth regard to
QK/ENCHANT, the document indeed says that Shaw was approved for unwitting use
-- you can order your own copy from the National Archives (all the info you
need to order it is in part four of my article, "Who Speaks for Clay Shaw?" at
the URL below). You can frame it and put it up on your wall as a reminder of
the kind of information you can expect from Lisa Pease and Co.
>Lie #3: His clearance for QK/ENCHANT was not related to the domestic
>contacts division.
Would Ms. Pease kindly post her evidence for that?
(Between you and me, Lisa would have been correct had she simply pointed out
that I goofed when I related QK/ENCHANT to DCS -- we don't actually have any
official confirmation of that. But now that Lisa has made an issue of it, I'll
go out on a limb and suggest that, for reasons detailed below, I may well be on
safer ground with my error than she is in her assertion above.)
>The CIA has not revealed what this project was, but
>Guy Johnson and E. Howard Hunt also had clearance for it.
Yes, and . . . ?
>
>The point was that Shaw KNOWINGLY lied on the stand when he denied ever
>having worked "for or with" the CIA.
First of all, Clay Shaw didn't say that. Has Lisa ever even read any of the
Shaw trial transcript? Here's the exact exchange Lisa purports to be quoting.
13 Q Mr. Shaw, have you ever worked for the Central
14 Intelligence Agency?
15 A No, I have not.
Now, since, in fact, Shaw did not work for the Central Intelligence Agency (the
HSCA determined, for example, that Shaw was never paid a dime by the CIA for
anything), Lisa is mistaken when she says that Shaw lied on the stand about
this, regardless of how the question was phrased. But someone who goes around
calling everyone she disagrees with "liars" should really be more careful about
their quotations, don't you think?
What was Clay Shaw's relationship to the CIA, you might ask? Well, Shaw
provided the agency with information on his travels and contacts abroad. He was
debriefed 30 times during the period of 1948-56, and eight reports were written
from his information. Six of these reports are available in full at the
National Archives and summaries of the other two are available. Bill Davy has
written briefly about these reports in *Probe* and in his book. They seem to be
pretty ho-hum items. At least, Davy's account of them is pretty ho-hum.
Now, what about QK/ENCHANT? Shaw was "granted covert security approval for use"
in this project "on an unwitting basis." So was the managing director of a
Trade Mart affiliate in San Francisco. So was this Guy Johnson person, and so
was Howard Hunt, later of Watergate fame.
What was QK/ENCHANT? Let's ask one of Lisa Pease's most trusted experts on the
subject of Clay Shaw, Mr. William Davy.
From "Through the Looking Glass," p. 54 fn. 16:
(quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CIA Information and Privacy coordinator, John Wright, has written to the author
that information on QK/ENCHANT is still classified. Yet, an admitted ex-CIA
employee has broadcast on a popular computer Bulletin Board System, that
QK/ENCHANT involved routine debriefing of people in the trade industry. Either
this person has violated his/her secrecy agreement by revealing classified
information or is deliberately spreading false information. Time will tell.
(end quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Okay, what's next?
>
>
>: The following is the basis for Lisa Pease and Martin Shackelford's claim
>about
>: ZR/CLIFF and Clay Shaw.
>
>
>Lie #4: Neither I nor Martin have made a claim about ZR/Cliff and Clay
>Shaw. What we have both noted, however, is that the CIA had a document
>that made the connection, and that the Bill Davy's book, which had been
>previously excerpted in Probe, had the reference to this.
>
First, let's see if Lisa is correct about Martin Shackelford.
Martin writes in his Fair Play article on Shaw, "Another recently released
document connects Shaw to the top secret project ZR/CLIFF, which was run out of
William Harvey's super-secret Staff D along with the ZR/RIFLE assassination
program."
So Lisa is incorrect about Mr. Shackelford when she writes, "Neither I nor
Martin have made a claim about ZR/Cliff and Clay Shaw." Martin says that Shaw
was somehow connected to this ZR/CLIFF thing.
Now, let's stop a minute and just make sure we're all clear what Lisa is saying
about her own previous claims. She says that all she ever claimed was that "the
CIA had a document that made the connection" between "ZR/Cliff and Clay Shaw."
And "the Bill Davy's [sic] book, which had been previously excerpted in Probe,
had the reference to this."
Now, is Lisa correct in stating that "the CIA had a document that made the
connection" between Clay Shaw and ZR/CLIFF, and that "the Bill Davy's book
[sic], which had been previously excerpted in Probe, had the reference to
this"?
Uhhhhhhhh . . . no.
Lisa belatedly posts this item, which duplicates information I've previously
posted:
>: Bill Davy writes that freelance pilot Leslie Norman Bradley was once
>considered
>: for a CIA operation called ZR/CLIFF, "but for unknown reasons the offer of
>: employment was withdrawn" (Davy, Let Justice Be Done, 88; citing CIA memo,
>: March 3, 1967, author unknown. Document id #1993.06.28.15:29:52:780280, JFK
>Box
>: # JFK1, Volume F, Folder 7).
>
>--
> Lisa Pease
>
Now, does anyone see Clay Shaw's name in that citation?
Anybody?
"So," you might well ask, "what in bloody hell is Lisa talking about, Dave?"
Well, if Lisa hadn't snipped some relevant material of my own, I wouldn't have
to repost the information on this alleged ZR/CLIFF-Clay Shaw "connection" Lisa
keeps saying is in Bill Davy's book. Let me quote from my article, "Who Speaks
for Clay Shaw?"
(quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bill Davy writes that freelance pilot Leslie Norman Bradley was once considered
for a CIA operation called ZR/CLIFF, "but for unknown reasons the offer of
employment was withdrawn" (Davy, Let Justice Be Done, 88). A Houston man named
Sam Kouffroth told the FBI that he'd asked Bradley "how he had been making a
living since being released from the Cuban prison and he replied that it was
pretty rough but that Clay Shaw of the International House was 'helping us'"
(Davy, 88-9).
(end quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
There, now -- isn't that much clearer? Why did Lisa Pease snip that passage
when it explained accurately and clearly the extent of the alleged
ZR/CLIFF-Shaw "connection"?
Could it be . . . because it proves her claims to be false?
Dave Reitzes
"Who Speaks for Clay Shaw?"
Dave Reitzes
Well, I've made the claim that Lambert's findings are verifiable, and Lisa
Pease has made the claim that Lambert's claims are not verifiable.
The only reasonable question seems to be:
Any verification volunteers?
Here's a repost of the information as it appeared in my previous post:
[Lisa wrote]
>.John's FIRST lie is that Russo's hypnosis session wasn't made available.
> The relevant portions were posted on my web site since the time of my first
> post about it. Anyone could read it and see how clearly Russo ID'd Shaw
> without being led by the hypnotist. It's still on my site, and I encourage
> anyone unfamiliar with this portion of the story to check it out
> (www.RealHistoryArchives.com).
Lisa isn't being very clear about these documents. Allow me to clarify.
First, there is the Andrew Sciambra memorandum titled "Interview with Perry
Russo at Mercy Hospital on Feb. 27, 1967." Perry Raymond Russo was interrogated
under the influence of sodium Pentothal in the emergency room operating ward at
Mercy Hospital on February 27, 1967. Sodium Pentothal was administered by
Coroner Nicholas Chetta, with Assistant DA Andrew Sciambra conducting the
interrogation and Assistant DA Alvin Oser taking notes. Sciambra prepared a
memorandum the following day.
Perry Russo was first interrogated under the influence of hypnosis -- not to be
confused with the use of sodium Pentothal -- by Dr. Esmond Fatter and Andrew
Sciambra on March 1, 1967. This interrogation took place in the office of
Coroner Nicholas Chetta. The transcript is labeled "First Hypnotic Session,
Exhibit F." Strangely, this can be found at Lisa Pease's Real History site at
the link called, "Text culled from the transcript of Russo's second hypnosis
session." The reason for this will be explained below.
Perry Russo was again interrogated under the influence of hypnosis, this time
in Assistant DA Charles Ward's office, on March 9, 1967. No transcript is known
to exist.
Perry Russo was interrogated again under the influence of hypnosis on March 12,
1967. This took place in Coroner Chetta's office, and the transcript is labeled
"2nd Hypnotic Session, Exhibit G." Lisa Pease's Real History site has a portion
of this transcript at a link marked, "Text culled from the transcript of
Russo's first hypnosis session." Again, the reason for this will be explained
below.
Perry Russo told Patricia Lambert in 1994 that he may have been hypnotized as
many as five times, though only the March 1 and March 12 transcripts are known
to exist.
Lisa Pease's Real History site offers students of the assassination links to
these four items:
(quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Text culled from the transcript of Russo's first [sic] hypnosis session
Text culled from the transcript of Russo's second [sic] hypnosis session
Sequence of Events Relating to Perry Russo
Text and Testimony relating to the two Sciambra Memos
(end quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I do not see a link to the transcript of "Interview with Perry Russo at Mercy
Hospital on Feb. 27, 1967."
So when Lisa Pease states that . . .
>.John's FIRST lie is that Russo's hypnosis session wasn't made available.
> The relevant portions were posted on my web site since the time of my first
> post about it.
. . . she seems to be confusing the record.
John McAdams wrote:
> I remember going through a charade just like this with the Mercy Hospital
> "truth serum" session of Perry Russo. The Garrisonites had the document,
> but they *concealed* it. They gave it to a few trusted people, and made
> them promise not to let it go further.
>
> Not surprisingly, when I got my hands on it and posted it, it blew Russo's
> credibility entirely out of the water.
The item John mentioned does not seem to be available on Lisa's Web site. It
is, however, available at John McAdams' Web site:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russo3.txt
An interesting sidenote to this affair concerns "a transcript of a statement
Perry Russo made under hypnosis. Garrison turned this document over the House
Select Committee in 1977 with a notation. Explaining why the pages were
numbered oddly (one to seventeen and one to thirteen), Garrison wrote that the
session was in parts because Dr. Fatter had apparently 'interposed' a 'break'
or 'rest period' for Russo's benefit. He did not. Garrison's 'document' is
actually two documents, the transcript of the first hypnosis session and
another, which took place eleven days later. Garrison combined them, reversing
their chronology, and labeled them 'A' and 'B'" (Patricia Lambert, *False
Witness,* 254-5).
The HSCA thus was led to believe that the March 12, 1967, session occurred
before the March 1, 1967, session. That is why Lisa Pease's Real History site
has the two sessions in the wrong order to this day. All of the above can be
verified at the National Archives.
Perry Russo described his experience with sodium Pentothal in this way:
(quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
He recalled lying on a table, the needle inserted into his right arm, as a
"clear substance" was administered, which he thought took about ten minutes,
and he felt nothing out of the ordinary. Then the Pentothal bottle was attached
and Russo reacted instantly. "My head started spinning round and round --
things started closing in on me and tightening up and I started getting violent
and upset." "I knew I was upset," he said. "I recall being bothered -- I didn't
want to be bothered, didn't want anybody to touch me and I didn't want anybody
close to me." At first "the doctors were holding me down." Then "I felt like I
was kicking at them." He became violent and had to be physically restrained.
"It seemed like they strapped my whole body, they strapped the right arm down
and they held the left arm . . . and they strapped me around the waist and
around the legs." "I just kept swinging and twisting and squirming away" and
"the needle came out once, at least, maybe more." "That's when they strapped me
down." "Oser . . . was holding me down right at the waist. He's big!" "He just
physically got on top of me and I kept saying, I remember saying, 'Get away you
mother fuckers, get away,' and I kicked at them and I was swinging at them."
After the session was over, Russo was unstrapped. But when he tried to stand
up, he couldn't. "I started to fall down," he said. He was "dizzy"; "had to
hold on to something" and was "sick" for "a couple of hours." He also felt
abandoned by Sciambra and the others. "Everybody was interested in going,"
Russo said. "They all left." "I felt like I was dropped like a coot" (Patricia
Lambert, *False Witness,* 72-3)
(end quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dave Reitzes
John's Web site contains numerous primary sources not available at Lisa Pease's
site, including the report of Lt. Edward O'Donnell, who tried to administer a
polygraph test to Perry Raymond Russo at Jim Garrison's request, and who had to
halt the test because Russo's nervousness was sending the deception indicators
off the charts. Russo confessed to O'Donnell that his story about "Clem
Bertrand" wasn't true. Garrison's men ordered O'Donnell not to say a word to
anyone about what Russo said, or that Russo had failed the test. (Fortunately,
O'Donnell disobeyed the DA's men.) Jim Garrison lied when he told *Playboy*
that Russo had not failed a polygraph test. In fact, Garrison was well aware
that Russo had failed TWO polygraph tests. The first had been administered by
Roy Jacob.
See Patricia Lambert's excellent *False Witness* for the entire story.
Dave Reitzes
In his memoirs, Garrison says that he knew where the local ONI office was
because of Guy Johnson:
(quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This I had learned from Guy Johnson, a long-time prosecutor in the district
attorney's office and a friend of mine who had been active in Naval
Intelligence in World War II and subsequently in the ONI Reserves; Johnson went
there [the New Orleans ONI office] frequently (OTTOTA, 1991 ed., 29 fn.).
(end quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Now, it might raise an eyebrow in some quarters to see Garrison hanging out
with ONI types, but I find it more interesting because Garrison also notes that
Guy Banister "had begun his career in World War II with the ONI" (OTTOTA, 29),
a claim for which there has never been any evidence whatsoever. Banister was an
FBI Special Agent in Charge all through World War II, stationed in Oklahoma
City (1941-43), then in Butte, Montana (1943-1951).
Garrison has never given the slightest indication where he heard that Banister
had been in the ONI, but it's hard to believe he'd never even asked his buddy
Guy Johnson about it.
Pop quiz:
In all the world, there only appears to be a single source besides Jim Garrison
alleging that Guy Banister served in the military during World War II, though
not with ONI, or even the Navy, but the Army. Has anyone been paying close
enough attention to certain posts of the last couple months to notice who this
other source on Banister's alleged WWII service is?
Dave Reitzes
"Who Speaks for Clay Shaw?"
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/shaw1.htm
"Davy Disappoints"
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/davy.htm
"Impeaching Clinton"
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/clinton1.htm
For many extraordinary resources on Jim Garrison's investigation, including
numerous primary sources available nowhere else on-line:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/garrison.htm
jpsh...@my-deja.com
lawyer or, briefly, Shaw's. Why not?
>
> Now, it might raise an eyebrow in some quarters to see Garrison hanging out
> with ONI types, but I find it more interesting because Garrison also notes that
> Guy Banister "had begun his career in World War II with the ONI" (OTTOTA, 29),
> a claim for which there has never been any evidence whatsoever. Banister was an
> FBI Special Agent in Charge all through World War II, stationed in Oklahoma
> City (1941-43), then in Butte, Montana (1943-1951).
>
> Garrison has never given the slightest indication where he heard that Banister
> had been in the ONI, but it's hard to believe he'd never even asked his buddy
> Guy Johnson about it.
>
> Pop quiz:
>
> In all the world, there only appears to be a single source besides Jim Garrison
> alleging that Guy Banister served in the military during World War II, though
> not with ONI, or even the Navy, but the Army. Has anyone been paying close
> enough attention to certain posts of the last couple months to notice who this
> other source on Banister's alleged WWII service is?
>
>
> Dave Reitzes
>
> "Who Speaks for Clay Shaw?"
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/shaw1.htm
>
> "Davy Disappoints"
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/davy.htm
>
> "Impeaching Clinton"
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/clinton1.htm
>
> For many extraordinary resources on Jim Garrison's investigation, including
> numerous primary sources available nowhere else on-line:
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/garrison.htm
>
>